11 ms·

Is your internet up to date?

150 points by BuuQu9hu 10y ago

madihaawan 10y ago
Yes, my internet is up to date.
alicewales 10y ago
> Is Your Internet Up-To-date? Of course it isn't. I live in the UK.
- wrboyce 10y ago
  Mine is, and I live in the UK also. I'm not sure what joke you're making. Sure, we may not have the best bandwidth (although at my previous house I had 250MBit), but supporting IPv6 (etc) has nothing to do with being in the UK. Find a decent ISP, I recommend Zen (or if you can afford them, AA).
  - alicewales 10y ago
    I can get an unreliable 3Mbps with the wind in the right direction on Openreach, or anything up to 200Mbps on Virgin Media. I'd rather not use VM's heavily filtered IPv6-free zone, but it's not a question of not being able to afford a decent ISP, it's just practicality.
    - dx034 10y ago
      I use Virgin Media and have no problems on any of my devices. Downlink can be a bit slower at busy times, but I guess that's nature of cable internet and uplink is always at the limit. And I really like that they very rarely change IP addresses (have mine for at least 3 months now). I have the feeling that Sky has slightly better peering (more stable speed to US & Asia during peak hours), but the higher speed on VM is more important here, and ping times are generally very low. What do you mean with IPv6-free zone? Have ipv6 disabled on my PC (for different reasons) but haven't experienced any connectivity problems on either Computers or other devices (which should be able to use IPv6). IF you mean missing availability of ipv6, I don't think that there are any pages you can't see on ipv4?
      - icebraining 10y ago
        IF you mean missing availability of ipv6, I don't think that there are any pages you can't see on ipv4? And there won't be while ISPs are lagging in their adoption, meaning nobody can set up a IPv6-only site if they expect to be accessible by everyone. Also, there's more than sites: an IPv4-only client can't connecting directly (P2P) to other clients behind carrier-grade IPv4 NAT, which leads to more centralized systems (and which give an advantage to large companies over more independent developers and open source groups). These ISPs are holding everyone back, hence the site submitted in this thread.
        dx034 10y ago
        I know that NATs were not designed as security features, but I'm not sure if we want to have every device out there to have an IP address without NAT. I think that this would bear massive potential for botnets to take over older machines. And replacing NATs with firewalls would ultimately lead to the same problem with P2P. It's unfortunate for people with more technical knowledge, but most people don't have that, and there is point protecting them from attacks (even if it's their fault that they didn't update).
        zeristor 10y ago
        Perhaps only test pages: http://ipv6.google.com/ http://ipv6.google.com/
  - tluyben2 10y ago
    Depends where you live. In Storrington the internet is rubbish and no phone signal. This is 2017 UK. Driving to London from that region you lose mobile signal at least 5 times completely. People act so entitled when they live in cities; I happen not to like cities which makes me a minority, but there are plenty of wealthy business people crying every day about their connection south of London (and probably in more places; most places around Exeter aren't great either).
    - lucaspiller 10y ago
      My parents live in a Dorset village and have the same issues. I'm on Three and even in the nearest towns (Dorchester, pop. 20k and Weymouth, pop. 50k) there is usually no or a very weak signal. They finally rolled out BT Infinity last year, so at least that's something. I live in Lithuania now and it really shocks me how bad the UK is for these things. Here I have 600/600 FTTH for €20/month and LTE is basically universal, even in remote parts of the country.
      - DaiPlusPlus 10y ago
        It's cheap in Lithuania and other countries because they were was no significant prior investment in telecoms infrastructure, and the costs of deployment are generally lower too (cheaper labour, easier planning-permission) - so when it comes to deploying Internet access to a previously disconnected community it only makes sense to roll-out the bleeding-edge technology (e.g. FTTH). Whereas in the UK, BT was/is obsessed with squeezing every last drop of bandwidth from POTS connections - because the cost of upgrading everyone's last-mile connections from copper (or even aluminium in some cases) to fibre is very cost-prohibitive: look at the sheer cost the cablecos shouldered during the mass roll-out of coax in the early-1990s (and even then, it was only to boxes in the street, not houses) - I understand their near-bankruptcy from this move lead to them all coming together under NTL and Telewest, and then Virgin Media. (The only thing that is inexplicable is how even modern, brand-new housing developments still have unshielded copper last-mile connections instead of FTTH: they don't even lay conduits to make it easier for possible future FTTH... idiocy) Give the UK a few more years and there should be a mandate from above requiring FTTH and we'll see progress: maybe even 10Gig FTTH as standard, then the tables will turn and people in Lithuania will be stuck with their 1Gbps service until their next round of major infrastructure investment, potentially decades away. (I'm aware that Fibre is generally more future-proof than copper, and a high-quality fibre line that handles 1Gbps today can easily handle 10Gbps, and potentially 40Gbps or even 100Gbps in the future - so my entire argument may be moot)
  - aneeshnl 10y ago
    I live in India and having 4 Mbps, which is a luxury. Not ready for IPv6. Situation is improving a lot recently though.
    - eb0la 10y ago
      Probably you'll get IPv6 in India sooner than people in Europe. I've read that the last mile in India is not yet liberalised and that's a huge growth factor in Internet usage. Once this barrier falls, invesment in network equipment (IPv6-enabled) will follow. Older, aka "mature" markets like Europe need some kind on incentive to switch to IPv6. Usually goverment subsidies...
  - Magnets 10y ago
    It's good if you have FTTC, it's very patchy if you don't
- alexdumitru 10y ago
  Come to Romania. We have IPv6, 1Gbps for just ~6 pounds. And as a bonus I got two 3G SIM cards + usb modems with unlimited traffic entirely free. http://www.speedtest.net/result/5951144497.png http://www.speedtest.net/result/5951144497.png
  - eumoria 10y ago
    O.o I'm in New York City which for America has pretty decent fiber service and 100mbit costs ~61 pounds ($75). Very jealous!
    - qubitcoder 10y ago
      For what it's worth, I'm getting 1,000Mbps with AT&T Fiber for $75 a month. I'm located just an hour northwest of Atlanta, in Rome, Georgia.
      - ubertaco 10y ago
        Over in Cherokee County, meanwhile, it's $70/mo with Comcast for 75Mbps. I was hopeful for a Google Fiber rollout when they announced it, but no dice.
        brb3 10y ago
        I'm paying $100/mo for gigabit fiber through Ringgold Telephone Company. I'm in Ringgold, GA (right on the Tennessee border, south of Chattanooga).
        a_brawling_boo 10y ago
        I don't think that Google is expanding any further in the atlanta market, but I am in Kennesaw, and have AT&T fiber which is pretty decent.
    - deathanatos 10y ago
      I'm in Silicon Valley, and outside of SF (where the ISP market isn't a monopoly), a gigabit from Comcast costs ~$300/mo. It still seems absurd to me that I'm 20 minutes from companies like Apple and Google, but getting decent ≥100Mbps Internet is expensive and challenging. (I pay for "business class" however, so my bill is slightly more expensive per Mbps because of that (the $300/mo above is residential, though). But I get an almost nearly static IPv4 address, and customer support that's only moderately bad, as opposed to the residential level support which beyond bad.)
hannob 10y ago
Wow, this is terribly misleading DNSSEC propaganda. It tells me: "Protected from redirection to false IP addresses (DNSSEC)" What does that mean? It means that whatever other DNS server I use seems to verify DNSSEC signatures (I use Google's DNS fwiw). Yet this doesn't provide any reasonable sense of protection, as the connection to that DNS server may very well be compromised. This would very well show DNSSEC protection in an open public wifi if the provider decided to enable DNSSEC.
- mdavids 10y ago
  You are right, but the wordings are chosen with the average internet user in mind. Luckily the 'DNSSEC'-word between brackets at the end let's you, the more tech savvy user, know what was really ment.
- phicoh 10y ago
  Yes. I like what they are trying to do, but they don't seem to actually think things through. It took me forever to get some of the server tests fixed, where it would report that my server didn't properly support IPv6 (in DNS) when in fact it did and just their test was wrong. For me it says now 'your DNS service providers are:' and then the name of the netblock owner. The actual name server is in my network.
  - okket 10y ago
    Currently the page is also showing a false negative in this case. My local DNS recursor validates DNSSEC: ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 1 But the test result says: Not protected from redirection to false IP addresses (DNSSEC)
    - mdavids 10y ago
      What does the 'detailed report' say at the DNSSEC-part?
- minxomat 10y ago
  The question for many residential internet users is: Just because I set my DNS to Google's, do my request really arrive there? Or does my ISP use transparent DNS proxies? I know that for many ISPs around here (Telekom especially), setting your DNS doesn't have any effect unless you run a local resolver (or DNScrypt). More info and how to test if you are affected by this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13037858 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13037858
cube00 10y ago
0% checking in from Australia
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ccozan 10y ago
Not really reliable. I have full IPv6 connectivity and it tells me the opposite.
blauditore 10y ago
If not, you can download the latest version here: http://www.downloadmoreram.com/download.html http://www.downloadmoreram.com/download.html
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
janvha 10y ago
The number of websites unreachable for not having IPv6 equals 0, so saying your internet is not "up to date" because you don't have IPv6 doesn't mean much
- phicoh 10y ago
  Two things. First, it is nice if you don't have to allocate ports on a NAT box to make a test system available. These days you can't really count on all non-production systems having public IPv4 addresses anymore. Obviously that only works if all systems that need access have IPv6. However, the main killer app for IPv6 is your ISP running out of IPv4 addresses. Carrier grade NAT boxes are expensive and introduce all kinds of issues. Better to move as much traffic to IPv6 as possible. Finally, IPv6 seems to be catching on: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html If at some point IPv6 traffic is the vast majority of the traffic for a website, then IPv4 traffic engineering may start to suffer. So technically the site will be reachable over IPv4 for a very long time. But it may be that at some point performance will be a lot worse then over IPv6.
  - zeristor 10y ago
    It appears that Google is seeing 16% ipv6 traffic at the moment, it was 10% a year ago, and 5% the year before that; so not quite on the Ogive climb. Mind you on a country by country basis Belgium has cleared 50% with Greece clearing 30%. Heartening to see Zimbabwe pass 7%, an anomaly for the whole of Africa, does anyone know whats going on there? Egypt is second with 0.50%. The map isn't set up for the Caribbean, although if you check the json used for the website Trinidad comes is at 12%. An egregious omission . https://www.google.com/intl/en_ALL/ipv6/statistics/data/worldmap.js https://www.google.com/intl/en_ALL/ipv6/statistics/data/worl... Perhaps I need to start a fantasy ipv6 migrarion website...
    - zeristor 10y ago
      The answer regarding Zimbabwe is Liquid Telecom: http://www.techzim.co.zw/2016/10/zimbabwe-leads-africa-ipv6-implementation-liquid-telecom-rolls-customers/ http://www.techzim.co.zw/2016/10/zimbabwe-leads-africa-ipv6-... http://ipv6-test.com/stats/country/ZW http://ipv6-test.com/stats/country/ZW
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
feld 10y ago
Meanwhile irssi just removed support for DANE in the irc client which I believe means that there are now zero irc clients that will attempt to validate you aren't talking to a rogue irc server. Wasn't irssi the first and only to implement it? DNSSEC is dead on arrival. Nobody actually wants it.
- iso-8859-1 10y ago
  I wasn't aware that DANE support was removed, but you're right, here's the commit: https://github.com/irssi/irssi/commit/5a04430998ada5ae800aa0a88638206de51287ca https://github.com/irssi/irssi/commit/5a04430998ada5ae800aa0...

150 points by BuuQu9hu 10y ago

madihaawan 10y ago

Yes, my internet is up to date.

alicewales 10y ago

> Is Your Internet Up-To-date? Of course it isn't. I live in the UK.

wrboyce 10y ago
Mine is, and I live in the UK also. I'm not sure what joke you're making. Sure, we may not have the best bandwidth (although at my previous house I had 250MBit), but supporting IPv6 (etc) has nothing to do with being in the UK. Find a decent ISP, I recommend Zen (or if you can afford them, AA).
- alicewales 10y ago
  I can get an unreliable 3Mbps with the wind in the right direction on Openreach, or anything up to 200Mbps on Virgin Media. I'd rather not use VM's heavily filtered IPv6-free zone, but it's not a question of not being able to afford a decent ISP, it's just practicality.
  - dx034 10y ago
    I use Virgin Media and have no problems on any of my devices. Downlink can be a bit slower at busy times, but I guess that's nature of cable internet and uplink is always at the limit. And I really like that they very rarely change IP addresses (have mine for at least 3 months now). I have the feeling that Sky has slightly better peering (more stable speed to US & Asia during peak hours), but the higher speed on VM is more important here, and ping times are generally very low. What do you mean with IPv6-free zone? Have ipv6 disabled on my PC (for different reasons) but haven't experienced any connectivity problems on either Computers or other devices (which should be able to use IPv6). IF you mean missing availability of ipv6, I don't think that there are any pages you can't see on ipv4?
    - icebraining 10y ago
      IF you mean missing availability of ipv6, I don't think that there are any pages you can't see on ipv4? And there won't be while ISPs are lagging in their adoption, meaning nobody can set up a IPv6-only site if they expect to be accessible by everyone. Also, there's more than sites: an IPv4-only client can't connecting directly (P2P) to other clients behind carrier-grade IPv4 NAT, which leads to more centralized systems (and which give an advantage to large companies over more independent developers and open source groups). These ISPs are holding everyone back, hence the site submitted in this thread.
      - dx034 10y ago
        I know that NATs were not designed as security features, but I'm not sure if we want to have every device out there to have an IP address without NAT. I think that this would bear massive potential for botnets to take over older machines. And replacing NATs with firewalls would ultimately lead to the same problem with P2P. It's unfortunate for people with more technical knowledge, but most people don't have that, and there is point protecting them from attacks (even if it's their fault that they didn't update).
      - zeristor 10y ago
        Perhaps only test pages: http://ipv6.google.com/ http://ipv6.google.com/
- tluyben2 10y ago
  Depends where you live. In Storrington the internet is rubbish and no phone signal. This is 2017 UK. Driving to London from that region you lose mobile signal at least 5 times completely. People act so entitled when they live in cities; I happen not to like cities which makes me a minority, but there are plenty of wealthy business people crying every day about their connection south of London (and probably in more places; most places around Exeter aren't great either).
  - lucaspiller 10y ago
    My parents live in a Dorset village and have the same issues. I'm on Three and even in the nearest towns (Dorchester, pop. 20k and Weymouth, pop. 50k) there is usually no or a very weak signal. They finally rolled out BT Infinity last year, so at least that's something. I live in Lithuania now and it really shocks me how bad the UK is for these things. Here I have 600/600 FTTH for €20/month and LTE is basically universal, even in remote parts of the country.
    - DaiPlusPlus 10y ago
      It's cheap in Lithuania and other countries because they were was no significant prior investment in telecoms infrastructure, and the costs of deployment are generally lower too (cheaper labour, easier planning-permission) - so when it comes to deploying Internet access to a previously disconnected community it only makes sense to roll-out the bleeding-edge technology (e.g. FTTH). Whereas in the UK, BT was/is obsessed with squeezing every last drop of bandwidth from POTS connections - because the cost of upgrading everyone's last-mile connections from copper (or even aluminium in some cases) to fibre is very cost-prohibitive: look at the sheer cost the cablecos shouldered during the mass roll-out of coax in the early-1990s (and even then, it was only to boxes in the street, not houses) - I understand their near-bankruptcy from this move lead to them all coming together under NTL and Telewest, and then Virgin Media. (The only thing that is inexplicable is how even modern, brand-new housing developments still have unshielded copper last-mile connections instead of FTTH: they don't even lay conduits to make it easier for possible future FTTH... idiocy) Give the UK a few more years and there should be a mandate from above requiring FTTH and we'll see progress: maybe even 10Gig FTTH as standard, then the tables will turn and people in Lithuania will be stuck with their 1Gbps service until their next round of major infrastructure investment, potentially decades away. (I'm aware that Fibre is generally more future-proof than copper, and a high-quality fibre line that handles 1Gbps today can easily handle 10Gbps, and potentially 40Gbps or even 100Gbps in the future - so my entire argument may be moot)
- aneeshnl 10y ago
  I live in India and having 4 Mbps, which is a luxury. Not ready for IPv6. Situation is improving a lot recently though.
  - eb0la 10y ago
    Probably you'll get IPv6 in India sooner than people in Europe. I've read that the last mile in India is not yet liberalised and that's a huge growth factor in Internet usage. Once this barrier falls, invesment in network equipment (IPv6-enabled) will follow. Older, aka "mature" markets like Europe need some kind on incentive to switch to IPv6. Usually goverment subsidies...
- Magnets 10y ago
  It's good if you have FTTC, it's very patchy if you don't
alexdumitru 10y ago
Come to Romania. We have IPv6, 1Gbps for just ~6 pounds. And as a bonus I got two 3G SIM cards + usb modems with unlimited traffic entirely free. http://www.speedtest.net/result/5951144497.png http://www.speedtest.net/result/5951144497.png
- eumoria 10y ago
  O.o I'm in New York City which for America has pretty decent fiber service and 100mbit costs ~61 pounds ($75). Very jealous!
  - qubitcoder 10y ago
    For what it's worth, I'm getting 1,000Mbps with AT&T Fiber for $75 a month. I'm located just an hour northwest of Atlanta, in Rome, Georgia.
    - ubertaco 10y ago
      Over in Cherokee County, meanwhile, it's $70/mo with Comcast for 75Mbps. I was hopeful for a Google Fiber rollout when they announced it, but no dice.
      - brb3 10y ago
        I'm paying $100/mo for gigabit fiber through Ringgold Telephone Company. I'm in Ringgold, GA (right on the Tennessee border, south of Chattanooga).
      - a_brawling_boo 10y ago
        I don't think that Google is expanding any further in the atlanta market, but I am in Kennesaw, and have AT&T fiber which is pretty decent.
  - deathanatos 10y ago
    I'm in Silicon Valley, and outside of SF (where the ISP market isn't a monopoly), a gigabit from Comcast costs ~$300/mo. It still seems absurd to me that I'm 20 minutes from companies like Apple and Google, but getting decent ≥100Mbps Internet is expensive and challenging. (I pay for "business class" however, so my bill is slightly more expensive per Mbps because of that (the $300/mo above is residential, though). But I get an almost nearly static IPv4 address, and customer support that's only moderately bad, as opposed to the residential level support which beyond bad.)

hannob 10y ago

Wow, this is terribly misleading DNSSEC propaganda. It tells me: "Protected from redirection to false IP addresses (DNSSEC)" What does that mean? It means that whatever other DNS server I use seems to verify DNSSEC signatures (I use Google's DNS fwiw). Yet this doesn't provide any reasonable sense of protection, as the connection to that DNS server may very well be compromised. This would very well show DNSSEC protection in an open public wifi if the provider decided to enable DNSSEC.

mdavids 10y ago
You are right, but the wordings are chosen with the average internet user in mind. Luckily the 'DNSSEC'-word between brackets at the end let's you, the more tech savvy user, know what was really ment.
phicoh 10y ago
Yes. I like what they are trying to do, but they don't seem to actually think things through. It took me forever to get some of the server tests fixed, where it would report that my server didn't properly support IPv6 (in DNS) when in fact it did and just their test was wrong. For me it says now 'your DNS service providers are:' and then the name of the netblock owner. The actual name server is in my network.
- okket 10y ago
  Currently the page is also showing a false negative in this case. My local DNS recursor validates DNSSEC: ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 1 But the test result says: Not protected from redirection to false IP addresses (DNSSEC)
  - mdavids 10y ago
    What does the 'detailed report' say at the DNSSEC-part?
minxomat 10y ago
The question for many residential internet users is: Just because I set my DNS to Google's, do my request really arrive there? Or does my ISP use transparent DNS proxies? I know that for many ISPs around here (Telekom especially), setting your DNS doesn't have any effect unless you run a local resolver (or DNScrypt). More info and how to test if you are affected by this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13037858 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13037858

cube00 10y ago

0% checking in from Australia

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

ccozan 10y ago

Not really reliable. I have full IPv6 connectivity and it tells me the opposite.

blauditore 10y ago

If not, you can download the latest version here: http://www.downloadmoreram.com/download.html http://www.downloadmoreram.com/download.html

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

janvha 10y ago

The number of websites unreachable for not having IPv6 equals 0, so saying your internet is not "up to date" because you don't have IPv6 doesn't mean much

phicoh 10y ago
Two things. First, it is nice if you don't have to allocate ports on a NAT box to make a test system available. These days you can't really count on all non-production systems having public IPv4 addresses anymore. Obviously that only works if all systems that need access have IPv6. However, the main killer app for IPv6 is your ISP running out of IPv4 addresses. Carrier grade NAT boxes are expensive and introduce all kinds of issues. Better to move as much traffic to IPv6 as possible. Finally, IPv6 seems to be catching on: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html If at some point IPv6 traffic is the vast majority of the traffic for a website, then IPv4 traffic engineering may start to suffer. So technically the site will be reachable over IPv4 for a very long time. But it may be that at some point performance will be a lot worse then over IPv6.
- zeristor 10y ago
  It appears that Google is seeing 16% ipv6 traffic at the moment, it was 10% a year ago, and 5% the year before that; so not quite on the Ogive climb. Mind you on a country by country basis Belgium has cleared 50% with Greece clearing 30%. Heartening to see Zimbabwe pass 7%, an anomaly for the whole of Africa, does anyone know whats going on there? Egypt is second with 0.50%. The map isn't set up for the Caribbean, although if you check the json used for the website Trinidad comes is at 12%. An egregious omission . https://www.google.com/intl/en_ALL/ipv6/statistics/data/worldmap.js https://www.google.com/intl/en_ALL/ipv6/statistics/data/worl... Perhaps I need to start a fantasy ipv6 migrarion website...
  - zeristor 10y ago
    The answer regarding Zimbabwe is Liquid Telecom: http://www.techzim.co.zw/2016/10/zimbabwe-leads-africa-ipv6-implementation-liquid-telecom-rolls-customers/ http://www.techzim.co.zw/2016/10/zimbabwe-leads-africa-ipv6-... http://ipv6-test.com/stats/country/ZW http://ipv6-test.com/stats/country/ZW

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

feld 10y ago

Meanwhile irssi just removed support for DANE in the irc client which I believe means that there are now zero irc clients that will attempt to validate you aren't talking to a rogue irc server. Wasn't irssi the first and only to implement it? DNSSEC is dead on arrival. Nobody actually wants it.

iso-8859-1 10y ago
I wasn't aware that DANE support was removed, but you're right, here's the commit: https://github.com/irssi/irssi/commit/5a04430998ada5ae800aa0a88638206de51287ca https://github.com/irssi/irssi/commit/5a04430998ada5ae800aa0...